Is Workfare Working? a Panel Discussion Sponsored by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Robert B
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Law and Policy Volume 8 | Issue 1 Article 3 1999 SYMPOSIUM: Is Workfare Working? A Panel Discussion Sponsored by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Robert B. Stulberg Ronald J. Tabak Alan Finder Mark Hoover Liz Krueger See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp Recommended Citation Robert B. Stulberg, Ronald J. Tabak, Alan Finder, Mark Hoover, Liz Krueger, Mary J. O'Connell, Gail Aska & Lawrence M. Mead, SYMPOSIUM: Is Workfare Working? A Panel Discussion Sponsored by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, 8 J. L. & Pol'y (1999). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol8/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Policy by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. SYMPOSIUM: Is Workfare Working? A Panel Discussion Sponsored by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Authors Robert B. Stulberg, Ronald J. Tabak, Alan Finder, Mark Hoover, Liz Krueger, Mary J. O'Connell, Gail Aska, and Lawrence M. Mead This article is available in Journal of Law and Policy: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol8/iss1/3 IS WORKFARE WORKING? A PANEL DISCUSSION SPONSORED BY THE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, APRIL 19, 1999 The following panel discussion, addressing the issue of New York City's recent welfare reforms, includes the transcripts of several notable panelists, who were kind enough to permit the Journal of Law and Policy to publish their remarks. The discussion was followed by an opportunity for the audience to present questions to the panelists, portions of which have also been included. The Editorial Board and Staff of the Journal supplemented the transcripts with footnotes and commentary in order to provide background material for the speakers' statements and to offer a starting point for readers to begin research on some of the issues raised by the panelists. The footnotes and commentary are those of the Journal and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the speakers. Similarly, the opinions of the speakers do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Journal. Introduction Robert B. Stulberg Moderator Ronald J. Tabak Panelists Alan Finder Mark Hoover Liz Krueger Mary J. O'Connell Gail Aska Lawrence M. Mead Robert B. Stulberg* Workfare, as many of you may know, is the popular phrase loosely applied to various government programs requiring welfare recipients to apply for and perform work as a condition of receiving benefits.2 Two factors made workfare a pressing and controversial issue, particularly in New York City. First, in 1996, Congress enacted the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Act ("TANF"), 3 which, for the first time, required states to implement * Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Chairman, Labor and Employment Committee; Partner, Broach & Stulberg, LLP; J.D., Antioch School of Law; B.A., Columbia College. 2 "The Committee [on Labor and Employment Law of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York] uses 'workfare' to refer to any program under which welfare recipients are required to work in exchange for their benefits." Workfare: Labor and Employment Law Issues, COMMITFEE ON LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW, ASS'N OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 1 (July, 1997) [hereinafter Bar Committee Report]. Welfare reform programs, mainly composed of workfare programs, have been implemented at both the federal and state level. Patricia A. Quigley, Protection of Existing Workers and the Implementation of "Workfare," 14 HOFSTRA LAB. L.J. 625, 625 (1997). The theory behind workfare is that no one should receive "a free ride." Id. Advocates of workfare programs state that work experience will teach job skills to those on welfare, which they can use to move into the real job market. Id. Critics of workfare fear that welfare recipients will displace existing workers, since many are being laid off due to budget constraints. Id. at 625-26. 3 Temporary Assistance to Needy Families ("TANF"), 42 U.S.C. § 601 (Supp. III 1997). TANF is a block grant program that gives the states broad discretion in establishing and maintaining their welfare programs. Id. Although the states are subject to some statutory limitations, they decide themselves who is eligible for assistance, what kind of assistance will be provided, for how long assistance will be provided and the terms and conditions under which the assistance will be provided. Id. The stated goals of TANF are to increase the flexibility of the states, provide assistance to needy families, and to end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work and marriage. Id. See Sheryll D. Cashin, Federalism, Welfare Reform, and the Minority Poor: Accounting for the Tyranny of State Majorities, 99 COLUM. L. REV. 552, 552-53 (1999) (explaining TANF as a block grant program giving discretion to states to design and administer welfare programs). JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY mandatory work requirements as a condition of receiving block welfare grants. Second, in New York City, the Giuliani Administra- tion, for a number of years, has been aggressively expanding its workfare programs, which now involve approximately 34,000 participants.4 At any given time, this workforce has been assigned to various City agencies5 and has functioned outside the civil 4 In fiscal year 1999, 33,833 public assistance recipients participated in New York City's workfare programs. CITY OF NEW YORK, MAYOR'S MGMT. REPORT, Vol. II, at 108 (1999). New York State enacted legislation in response to federal mandates, putting welfare recipients to work in order to earn their benefits. N.Y. SOC. SERV. LAW § 331 (McKinney 1992 & Supp. 1999). The Social Services Law states, "[i]t is hereby declared to be the policy of the state that there be programs under which individuals receiving public assistance will be furnished work activities and employment opportunities, and necessary services in order to secure unsubsidized employment that will assist participants to achieve economic independence." Id. In 1995, New York City commenced its "enhanced Work Experience Program," ("WEP") with the goal of moving public assistance recipients into full-time jobs. See Brukhman v. Giuliani, 662 N.Y.S.2d 914, 916 (Sup. Ct. 1997), rev'd, 678 N.Y.S.2d. 45 (App. Div. 1998) (discussing New York City's workfare program). Under the program, welfare recipients must seek out private-sector work for 30 to 45 days with the supervision of New York City Human Resources Administration ("HRA") welfare caseworkers. Liz Willen, Change is in the Cards/ForBetter or for Worse, New Laws and Attitudes Will Continue to Remake the Welfare State, NEWSDAY (N.Y.), May 23, 1999, at A19. Welfare recipients who cannot find private-sector jobs must take City workfare employment at the penalty of having their benefits suspended. Id. To enable welfare recipients to find employment, between May 1998 and July 1999, HRA converted 19 Income Support Centers into 16 Job Centers. CITY OF NEW YORK, MAYOR'S MGMT. REPORT, Vol. I, at 251 (1999) [hereinafter MAYOR'S MGMT. REPORT Vol. I]. By August 1999, 10 Job Centers included on-site services or Learning Labs. Id. By the end of Fiscal 1999, all 16 Job Centers included Resource Rooms that provide public assistance applicants with assistance in arranging child care, referrals for assistance with home and family problems and employment related activities such as help with job searching, resume preparation and interviewing techniques. Id. at 252. ' WEP participants are sent to various employment sites in both the private and public sectors. For instance one such agency, the New York City Housing Authority ("NYCHA"), provided full time employment to 469 WEP participants during the 1999 fiscal year. MAYOR'S MGMT. REPORT Vol. I, supra note 3, at 122. The New York City Department of Parks and Recreation also employed WEP participants. MAYOR'S MGMT. REPORT Vol. I, supra note 3, at 150. In addition, the Department of Parks and Recreation also provides a career training PANEL DISCUSSION service system and outside the regular wage hour and collective bargaining structures of public employment. I should make brief disclosures before we go further. I have represented union members as plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging certain workfare assignments at a City agency. In addition, the Association has taken certain public positions concerning work- 6 fare. We are most fortunate to have an extraordinary panel of speakers to discuss this topic and I would like to introduce them. Alan Finder, who many of you may recognize from NY I,7 has been a reporter on the Metropolitan Staff of the New York Times for thirteen years covering housing, labor, transportation, legal affairs, government and politics. He served in the New York Times' City Hall bureau from 1986 through 1987, during the Koch program that found 279 WEP participants employment in the private sector for 30 days or longer. MAYOR'S MGMT. REPORT Vol. I, supra note 3, at 150. WEP participants are sent to over 350 WEP sites throughout New York City. Human Resources Administration, Welfare to Work (visited Nov. 8, 1999) <http://www.- ci.nyc.ny.us/html/hra/html/welfare to work.html>. 6 See generally Bar Committee Report, supra note 1 (discussing the Committee's recommendations on welfare). The Committee has recommended to the State Legislature to use its authority under TANF to minimize the displacement effects of workfare on regular workers. Bar Committee Report, supra note 1, at 19. With regard to the minimum wage protection contained in the Social Services Law, the Committee recommends that these laws be maintained with a modification for workfare participants.